• MrEUser@lemmy.ninja
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        37
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        The problem with these lists is that people sneak things on to them.

        I’m an admin on (and owner of) lemmy.ninja. We have clear anti-harassment rules, up front, in bold, front page. We have zero bots (checked daily). We have users that are LGBTQIA+. I have zero tolerance for bigotry.

        Yet our site is on the lists provided.

        Apparently it doesn’t matter (the lists don’t work) because all of my cross posts (from my boomer shooter community) are available on beehaw.org in their gaming section.

        So these lists can be used as weapons, if they work. When thy don’t work they are just an indictment without evidence.

        • neo (he/him)@lemmy.comfysnug.space
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          That sucks to be you. Enjoy being seen as a right-wing extremist no matter your personal or professional actions.

          P.S. asking for evidence is racist and enables harassment (they genuinely believe this)

        • God@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          18
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Yet our site is on the lists provided.

          you’re wrong, your site is allowed by all the lists I mentioned.

          So these lists can be used as weapons, if they work

          These lists are not weapons, they are provided by the instances themselves. They are not false or artificial. They are current, and they display exactly what is real in the configuration of the servers.

          • Drewfro66@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            The issue is if these lists end up being blindly copied based on trust, and instances that don’t deserve to be banned end up being banned by dozens of instances just because they’re copying lists.

            Something similar happened with Twitter banlists. A lot of the accounts were trolls and fascists and whatnot, but oftentimes someone with progressive views who is just a little controversial ends up on a banlist and banned by half of Twitter because one guy decided to stick him on a widely used banlist.

            • God@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              There are 3 categories in settings on your server, as far as I know: Linked, Allowed and Blocked. I don’t know the difference between Linked and Allowed, but yes, these links contain multiple lists on the same page. The format is the following: https://domain.tld/instances, you will normally find from 1 to 3 lists there, (the Linked, Allowed and Blocked lists). Linked is normal, Blocked is defederated. Idk what Allowed is but I think it is also federated so 🤷

              • neo (he/him)@lemmy.comfysnug.space
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Linked are servers that your server knows about (that have communicated with it)

                Allowed, or the allow-list, if present means that the server can only federate with servers in the allow list. This is the most restrictive setting possible.

                Block, or disallow-list, means that these servers may not federate with yours. This is where servers go generally when they are “defederated”.

              • MrEUser@lemmy.ninja
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Thank you for the clarification. The problem I have is:

                Note that dbzer0 on the federation-checker.vercel.app shows we are being blocked. fba.ryona.agency shows that too, and apparently we are edgelords,don’t moderate, and have done something wrong with free speech…

                So something somewhere is broken…

                • God@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  The problem with dbzer0 is the same we had talked about before (edit: I talked with someone else from lemmy.ninja about this topic, your instance was blocked before). It’s old news. It’s from when you had a bot problem. Ryona has a cache and doesn’t clear it too often.

                  The problem with toot.foundation has nothing to do with that, though. I have no idea why they would block you. You can find the up to date list of blocked instances on a mastodon by going to the https://instance.tld/about. For example, for toot.foundation, which does block lemmy.ninja, here is the updated blocklist at the bottom, you have to click Moderated servers: https://toot.foundation/about

                  • MrEUser@lemmy.ninja
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    6
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Okay. Thank you or your time. I’m just trying to identify if I have a user that is harassing people or something.

          • d-RLY?
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            While you did clarify for MrEUser. I will say that they could be weaponized if they are just taken by instances without understanding why they were blocked by the originating instance (especially if it is a larger one). It is obviously up to the instance creators to research things. So I am not saying that it is the same as Reddit outright banning links to sites.

            But I think it is fair to consider that since many of the sites that are blocked are either linking possibly illegal or openly bigoted content. That plenty of others will think that all the blocked instances are doing those things. All because the more mainstream a site becomes with “normies”, they just see it as black and white (like they do with lots of real world things). While the actual case is that the ones that aren’t doing those things might just be blocked due to more nuanced reasons. Maybe it is simply differences in politics or maybe even just the creator trying to only federate with instances of the same language in order to make sure everyone can read the posts/comments.

            That doesn’t mean that instances being able to block other instances is automatically bad or anything. It is very helpful to be able to openly see which instances are and aren’t allowed. Which is at least surface level transparent for users and potential users. And can be used for creators of instances that might have been blocked to reach out and work things out if it was blocked. Which is something that (to my knowledge) all the major social media sites do not offer and tend to hide. Preferring shadowbans and only openly admitting it if it is super problematic (like bigots or openly illegal stuff).

            • God@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I can somehow agree with a few things you say, but overall I think the premise is wrong. The fact is not that most blocks or even half the blocks are due to having illegal or bad content. I also don’t know any defederation based on language or any such matter (especially since languages seen is already solved by your profile selection of language). Most blocks are automated, especially for instances that have trouble handling bot sign-ups, or those that have moderation issues. I think that the assumptions that one can make are indeed dangerous but they’re not based in reality, but in imaginary facts about what defederation means. Obviously, since we’re growing very fast, I agree that newcomers and less technically minded people may believe this is the case and use blocklists to justify random assumptions. But in the end, they would be entirely wrong, and wrong assumptions can be made about practically anything, so I wouldn’t put much value or thought into the possible wraponizationability of instance defederation lists.

              • d-RLY?
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Maybe “weaponizing” is a bit more hyperbolic than what I should’ve said, but it was because it was used in the other comment. So I do think we agree on the points that functionally matter anyway (even if they may not actually apply to how things are working). I still think that us all having this kind of discourse is a good thing. As it can be helpful for both the parties directly interacting, along with maybe those that are looking for information. I would rather admit I was misunderstanding/misinformed and learn why. It will still be something I will be concerned about as things grow/develop. But mostly because many things that have turned out to be bad weren’t started with that intention. Like lots of tech things that have come out over the years that only worked the way they should if you were a white male. Not because the coders were actually racist or sexist, but because they didn’t stop and think about testing it outside their bubble

        • God@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          yup, they block many things, so if u wanna block many many things, why not start looking at what ppl who block many many things block?

    • anfieldiro
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      97
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ah yes, block entire instances en masse without the hassle of actually making the decision yourself, that would be nice

      • borlax@lemmy.borlax.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        89
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I run my own instance so that i can take a little control over the drivel that scrolls past my eyes. Far right ideologies don’t deserve a platform or an audience.

        • Synthead@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          36
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Yeah, free speech simply means that you won’t get arrested for being an asshole. It doesn’t mean you’re entitled to be bigoted on a service someone else is hosting. This could be a single person hosting a pet as a hobby, or a corporation at a large scale. It doesn’t matter as long as it’s a third-party that you don’t own.

          If people want to be jerks on purpose without others getting involved, they can find their own place to share ideas or host a service themselves. And if they don’t like people challenging their ideas, they can block them too, because they have that right on their own stuff.

          Some people believe that hate and discrimination is the new normal and should be condoned by everyone. If it’s a religion thing, perhaps they should reconsider what aspects of “blind” is important in blind faith? Regardless, it’s incredible how people find these unfounded hills to die on.

          Besides, their hate is directed towards what’s fashionable at the time. “Owning slaves” and “owning women” was once something people fought for. Later, when human rights started getting voted into law, their disagreement started to be expressed through bigotry.

          But now that society doesn’t have much room to be racist or sexist, they are migrating to other groups they don’t like. Did they generally decide that they were wrong about their previously-targeted groups? And they’re positive that the new groups are the right groups to hate? Or perhaps some people just have a chip on their shoulder and want to hate using whatever mental gymnastics are necessary to validate themselves?

          Regardless, social media is just a way for people to talk to each other, hosted by a person or a group. In terms of what’s allowed to be said, technology is irrelevant. If someone invites you to dinner for the first time, and you’re blatantly racist, you’ll probably get kicked out. Social media, hosted by others, presents exactly the same set of circumstances, no matter if your voice goes through a webserver and a database first or not.

        • anfieldiro
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          77
          ·
          1 year ago

          Idk, gonna be a very hot take, but I like my beliefs challenged and believe that everyone deserves a voice

          • hare_ware@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            26
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I agree with this, but some beliefs are well… utterly stupid and not worth reconsidering. It’s a waste of time really.

            • pingveno
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              15
              ·
              1 year ago

              It’s the deciding which ones are worthless that gets dangerous, particularly when “worthless” involves prison sentences.

              • epicspongee [they/them or he/him]@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                10
                ·
                1 year ago

                It’s the deciding which ones are worthless that gets dangerous

                Not making a decision is in and of itself a decision. Saying ‘Nazis deserve a voice because everyone deserves a voice’ removes the voice of minorities because Nazis murder and oppress minorities. There is a decision that has to be made somewhere. Saying ‘everyone deserves a voice and Nazis deserve a platform!’ is limiting the voice of minorities.

                • pingveno
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  You misunderstand me. Not everyone deserves to be given attention or a platform. The government just shouldn’t have the power to mete out punishment to individuals or institutions for their speech. Governments need to be as consistent as possible in keeping out of the business of censoring speech.

                • pingveno
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  8
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Sure. In authoritarian states, it’s common to outlaw “lies” about the government, where the government essentially gets to define what a lie is. The United States has its history with such laws in the Alien and Sedition Act in the late 18th century. In more modern times, you see things like Russia outlawing “lies” about the Russo-Ukraine War (including calling it a war). And by lies, I mean anything that does not match Russia’s “everything is fine” narrative. There’s also Poland banning discussion of Nazi collaboration by Poles in 2018.

                  I definitely separate that from things like deplatforming. Both people and companies should have freedom of association when it comes to political opinions. They should never be forced to support speech that they disagree with.

                • pingveno
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  None of them. Lemmy instances defederating are the epitome of another freedom, freedom of association. People should be able to choose who and who not to associate with without interference from the government.

              • boentrough
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                We actually had a whole war about this, it was pretty universally decided there’s one way of thinking that is not compatible with humanity. It’s like the only forbidden ideology.

                We don’t have to debate it.

                “Some human lives don’t have value” being essentially universally rejected does make it seem edgy and cool to monsters and people people who just need to find out those ideas exclude them from society. However, the way these people are handled is by telling them these ideas are bad and won’t be tolerated. One group doubles down, the other decides to learn why and moves on with their lives.

                That’s the whole discussion, there isn’t debate.

                What exchange of ideas do you want with Nazis?

                “Do all humans have value?”

                “Yes, eugenics, apartheid, genocide, and Holocaust are evil and can’t be tolerated”

                “What about the well understood steps, lies and propaganda used to make those ideas seem acceptable.”

                “We also recognize those and won’t debate them.”

                “What about free speech?”

                “The government will not stop you from exposing yourself as a Nazi, no one else has to tolerated it.”

                “But both sides”

                “GTFO”

                • pingveno
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  We actually had a whole war about this, it was pretty universally decided there’s one way of thinking that is not compatible with humanity. It’s like the only forbidden ideology.

                  My problem is that “forbidden ideology” suffers from mission creep. First you’re going after Nazis, then it’s others ideologies. Communists or capitalists. Religions (think Islam in the US post-9/11). “Hate” that is just uncomfortable to a majority group. Simply outlawing Nazis is the easy way out. Also, defining “Nazis” or “fascists” has problems of who gets to decide. Some people are willing to apply that label willy nilly. Hell, I’ve been labeled as fascist on this server, even though any actual fascist would struggle to find common cause with me.

                  I’m 100% for making it difficult for Nazis, white nationalists, etc. to spread their hatred. But the moment you start clapping handcuffs on them for their (shitty) words, you’re setting a precedent that is in practice misused.

                  • boentrough
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Yes, yes we should all be Elon Musk style “free speech” absolutists, and we shouldn’t be intolerant of intolerance, because that’s the real intolerance.

                    You used alot of words to literally support Nazis.

                    I’m sorry I don’t know what to tell you.

                    I said we have chosen one, just one forbidden ideology, because it literally calls for death camps, and your response is, “if we don’t support the death camp ideology, someone might not support the antideath camp ideology”.

                    I don’t know how to respond to that, but only because you had to misinterpret what I said, and the amount of mental gymnastics what you said took makes the flaws self evident in what you said.

          • CurlyWurlies4All@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            28
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            Fascism isn’t an ideology that gets defeated in the marketplace of ideas. It’s core belief is enabling a small minority to violently destroy other lives. It’s not worth your consideration.

          • epicspongee [they/them or he/him]@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            23
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Idk, gonna be a very hot take, but I like my beliefs challenged and believe that everyone deserves a voice

            Nazis had a voice once, and folks listened to them. And we ended up with the Holocaust.

            Might be controversial but I don’t believe that people who want to murder minorities deserve a voice. I feel like that’s a pretty reasonable bar to set lol.

            • tobor@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Might be controversial but I don’t believe that people who want to murder minorities deserve a voice. I feel like that’s a pretty reasonable bar to set lol.

              It’s not controversial at all. The only people making “controversy” out of it are the ones who are mad they can’t spew hate

            • anfieldiro
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              16
              ·
              1 year ago

              Sure, but did they actually say they want to murder minorities?? I’m yet to see that

          • MrEUser@lemmy.ninja
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            21
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            The problem is, this isn’t just a challenge to beliefs. This is the internet. The darkest most depraved shit that can exist… does. People forcing children to do things with animals… I’ll stop there…

            The U.S. constitution supports free speech. Even it has limits. You can’t yell fire in a movie theater and not face the consequences of injuries your speech causes.

            • mc1472@lemmy.fmhy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              16
              ·
              1 year ago

              You in fact can yell fire in a theater without being arrested. It depends on the context (and weather or not there where injuries)

              If the play calls for it and an actor says it. Or more simply if the theater is on fire.

              With speech laws it matters more what the context is to the intended audience than what is specifically said.

              • MrEUser@lemmy.ninja
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Did I not mention being responsible for injuries? Your absolutely right, but you’re not correct…

              • boentrough
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                This is actually a dumb response.

                You knew the content and context, and answered a different question to look smart.

                It made you look dumber.

            • anfieldiro
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              10
              ·
              1 year ago

              So you ban the “everyone deserves a voice” types? Because that’s what I said.

                • anfieldiro
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  8
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Tf is to sealion?? And I’d like to see the nazis you seem to be unable to not mention in a comment. What I’ve seen is that instances are defederating from exploding-heads. I’ve gone there, seen some edgier memes, some christianity oriented memes, some better memes(those three not being the same memes obv, the Biden ones are pretty unfunny). I’ve seen some honestly sensible policies - instead of banning people for using le bad words, they encourage people who are sensitive to such stuff to block and move on. You seem to call people fucking Nazis for using language that offends you, right?

          • fiah@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I like my beliefs challenged

            you like it when “other people should be treated as people as a bare minimum” is getting challenged? because that’s the belief that your average xeno-/homo-/transphobic asshole challenges. Many beliefs I have ought to be challenged on the regular, but not THAT one

          • Mirshe@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            The world came together in WWII and decided that Nazis didn’t deserve a place at the table. There’s a difference between “let’s decide whose economic policy is more useful now” and “hey I want everyone to have a nice life and these guys think a large chunk of the world doesn’t deserve to live at all.”

      • epicspongee [they/them or he/him]@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        31
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Blocking instances actually makes the lives of instance admins a lot easier. It not only reduces a whole chunk of problematic content for you to moderate, but it also encourages Nazis to go to the servers you block instead of yours. Nazis can’t subscribe to the subs they want to on your server, and they get banned if they say Nazi shit, so they just leave and go to a Nazi server instead. It’s like fly paper for Nazis lol.

        As a Mastodon admin with a few thousand users, I rarely see Nazi content that I have to moderate. And that’s because when I started I spent an enormous amount of time sifting through every server we federated with and blocking all of the Nazis and all the pedos and all the TERFs. And because I did that at the start, I only get maybe 10 reports a week, none of them are content that would traumatize me (almost always spam), and I also helped the servers that now use my list to do the same.

        Blocking instances not only makes it easier for me to do my job, it encourages other admins to not tolerate these kinds of behaviors as well. Because if they don’t moderate well, that attracts Nazis, and then we have to limit or ban them because we’re volunteers. So everyone just ends up blocking the shittiest servers and moderates their user base well. It’s a win/win for everyone.

        Nazis are not entitled to access to minorities on my server. TERFs are not entitled to access to trans users on my server. Assholes are not entitled to have access to an audience on my server. There are tons of white supremacists or TERFs or other assholes hosting plenty of other servers where they can go and do that. But I don’t want that on servers I host and my users don’t want that on servers I host. If you truly believe free speech is such a big fucking deal, then you are welcome to leave and join one of those rotting servers as well. See how fun that is for you and how long it takes for you to come crawling back.